DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty

Abstract

Abstract. The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from −5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for keymore » individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the ice–climate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty.« less

Authors:
ORCiD logo; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo more »; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ORCiD logo; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ; ORCiD logo; ORCiD logo; ; ORCiD logo « less
Publication Date:
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
2229170
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Published Article
Journal Name:
The Cryosphere (Online)
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: The Cryosphere (Online) Journal Volume: 17 Journal Issue: 12; Journal ID: ISSN 1994-0424
Publisher:
Copernicus GmbH
Country of Publication:
Germany
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Seroussi, Hélène, Verjans, Vincent, Nowicki, Sophie, Payne, Antony J., Goelzer, Heiko, Lipscomb, William H., Abe-Ouchi, Ayako, Agosta, Cécile, Albrecht, Torsten, Asay-Davis, Xylar, Barthel, Alice, Calov, Reinhard, Cullather, Richard, Dumas, Christophe, Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K., Gladstone, Rupert, Golledge, Nicholas R., Gregory, Jonathan M., Greve, Ralf, Hattermann, Tore, Hoffman, Matthew J., Humbert, Angelika, Huybrechts, Philippe, Jourdain, Nicolas C., Kleiner, Thomas, Larour, Eric, Leguy, Gunter R., Lowry, Daniel P., Little, Chistopher M., Morlighem, Mathieu, Pattyn, Frank, Pelle, Tyler, Price, Stephen F., Quiquet, Aurélien, Reese, Ronja, Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne, Shepherd, Andrew, Simon, Erika, Smith, Robin S., Straneo, Fiammetta, Sun, Sainan, Trusel, Luke D., Van Breedam, Jonas, Van Katwyk, Peter, van de Wal, Roderik S. W., Winkelmann, Ricarda, Zhao, Chen, Zhang, Tong, and Zwinger, Thomas. Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty. Germany: N. p., 2023. Web. doi:10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023.
Seroussi, Hélène, Verjans, Vincent, Nowicki, Sophie, Payne, Antony J., Goelzer, Heiko, Lipscomb, William H., Abe-Ouchi, Ayako, Agosta, Cécile, Albrecht, Torsten, Asay-Davis, Xylar, Barthel, Alice, Calov, Reinhard, Cullather, Richard, Dumas, Christophe, Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K., Gladstone, Rupert, Golledge, Nicholas R., Gregory, Jonathan M., Greve, Ralf, Hattermann, Tore, Hoffman, Matthew J., Humbert, Angelika, Huybrechts, Philippe, Jourdain, Nicolas C., Kleiner, Thomas, Larour, Eric, Leguy, Gunter R., Lowry, Daniel P., Little, Chistopher M., Morlighem, Mathieu, Pattyn, Frank, Pelle, Tyler, Price, Stephen F., Quiquet, Aurélien, Reese, Ronja, Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne, Shepherd, Andrew, Simon, Erika, Smith, Robin S., Straneo, Fiammetta, Sun, Sainan, Trusel, Luke D., Van Breedam, Jonas, Van Katwyk, Peter, van de Wal, Roderik S. W., Winkelmann, Ricarda, Zhao, Chen, Zhang, Tong, & Zwinger, Thomas. Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty. Germany. https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023
Seroussi, Hélène, Verjans, Vincent, Nowicki, Sophie, Payne, Antony J., Goelzer, Heiko, Lipscomb, William H., Abe-Ouchi, Ayako, Agosta, Cécile, Albrecht, Torsten, Asay-Davis, Xylar, Barthel, Alice, Calov, Reinhard, Cullather, Richard, Dumas, Christophe, Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K., Gladstone, Rupert, Golledge, Nicholas R., Gregory, Jonathan M., Greve, Ralf, Hattermann, Tore, Hoffman, Matthew J., Humbert, Angelika, Huybrechts, Philippe, Jourdain, Nicolas C., Kleiner, Thomas, Larour, Eric, Leguy, Gunter R., Lowry, Daniel P., Little, Chistopher M., Morlighem, Mathieu, Pattyn, Frank, Pelle, Tyler, Price, Stephen F., Quiquet, Aurélien, Reese, Ronja, Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne, Shepherd, Andrew, Simon, Erika, Smith, Robin S., Straneo, Fiammetta, Sun, Sainan, Trusel, Luke D., Van Breedam, Jonas, Van Katwyk, Peter, van de Wal, Roderik S. W., Winkelmann, Ricarda, Zhao, Chen, Zhang, Tong, and Zwinger, Thomas. Thu . "Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty". Germany. https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023.
@article{osti_2229170,
title = {Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty},
author = {Seroussi, Hélène and Verjans, Vincent and Nowicki, Sophie and Payne, Antony J. and Goelzer, Heiko and Lipscomb, William H. and Abe-Ouchi, Ayako and Agosta, Cécile and Albrecht, Torsten and Asay-Davis, Xylar and Barthel, Alice and Calov, Reinhard and Cullather, Richard and Dumas, Christophe and Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K. and Gladstone, Rupert and Golledge, Nicholas R. and Gregory, Jonathan M. and Greve, Ralf and Hattermann, Tore and Hoffman, Matthew J. and Humbert, Angelika and Huybrechts, Philippe and Jourdain, Nicolas C. and Kleiner, Thomas and Larour, Eric and Leguy, Gunter R. and Lowry, Daniel P. and Little, Chistopher M. and Morlighem, Mathieu and Pattyn, Frank and Pelle, Tyler and Price, Stephen F. and Quiquet, Aurélien and Reese, Ronja and Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne and Shepherd, Andrew and Simon, Erika and Smith, Robin S. and Straneo, Fiammetta and Sun, Sainan and Trusel, Luke D. and Van Breedam, Jonas and Van Katwyk, Peter and van de Wal, Roderik S. W. and Winkelmann, Ricarda and Zhao, Chen and Zhang, Tong and Zwinger, Thomas},
abstractNote = {Abstract. The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from −5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the ice–climate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty.},
doi = {10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023},
journal = {The Cryosphere (Online)},
number = 12,
volume = 17,
place = {Germany},
year = {Thu Dec 07 00:00:00 EST 2023},
month = {Thu Dec 07 00:00:00 EST 2023}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Brief communication: A roadmap towards credible projections of ice sheet contribution to sea level
journal, December 2021

  • Aschwanden, Andy; Bartholomaus, Timothy C.; Brinkerhoff, Douglas J.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 15, Issue 12
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-15-5705-2021

Time Series Forecasting with Gaussian Processes Needs Priors
book, January 2021

  • Corani, Giorgio; Benavoli, Alessio; Zaffalon, Marco
  • Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Applied Data Science Track
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86514-6_7

A Simple, Coherent Framework for Partitioning Uncertainty in Climate Predictions
journal, September 2011

  • Yip, Stan; Ferro, Christopher A. T.; Stephenson, David B.
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 24, Issue 17
  • DOI: 10.1175/2011JCLI4085.1

Ice-sheet model sensitivities to environmental forcing and their use in projecting future sea level (the SeaRISE project)
journal, January 2013

  • Bindschadler, Robert A.; Nowicki, Sophie; Abe-Ouchi, Ayako
  • Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 59, Issue 214
  • DOI: 10.3189/2013JoG12J125

Assessment of the importance of ice-shelf buttressing to ice-sheet flow: BUTTRESSING SENSITIVITY
journal, February 2005

  • Dupont, T. K.; Alley, R. B.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1029/2004GL022024

Statistical Analysis in Climate Research
book, January 1999


Projected land ice contributions to twenty-first-century sea level rise
journal, May 2021


Four decades of Antarctic Ice Sheet mass balance from 1979–2017
journal, January 2019

  • Rignot, Eric; Mouginot, Jérémie; Scheuchl, Bernd
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 116, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1812883116

Fracture field for large-scale ice dynamics
journal, January 2012

  • Albrecht, Torsten; Levermann, Anders
  • Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 58, Issue 207
  • DOI: 10.3189/2012JoG11J191

Anova
book, January 1992


A simple inverse method for the distribution of basal sliding coefficients under ice sheets, applied to Antarctica
journal, January 2012


The future sea-level contribution of the Greenland ice sheet: a multi-model ensemble study of ISMIP6
journal, January 2020


initMIP-Antarctica: an ice sheet model initialization experiment of ISMIP6
journal, January 2019


Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis
journal, June 2023

  • Masson-Delmotte, Valérie; Zhai, Panmao; Pirani, Anna
  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
  • DOI: 10.1017/9781009157896

Results of the third Marine Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project (MISMIP+)
journal, January 2020

  • Cornford, Stephen L.; Seroussi, Helene; Asay-Davis, Xylar S.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 14, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-14-2283-2020

ISMIP6 Antarctica: a multi-model ensemble of the Antarctic ice sheet evolution over the 21st century
journal, January 2020

  • Seroussi, Hélène; Nowicki, Sophie; Payne, Antony J.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 14, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-14-3033-2020

Experimental protocol for sea level projections from ISMIP6 stand-alone ice sheet models
journal, January 2020

  • Nowicki, Sophie; Goelzer, Heiko; Seroussi, Hélène
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 14, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-14-2331-2020

Mass balance of the Antarctic Ice Sheet from 1992 to 2017
journal, June 2018


A protocol for calculating basal melt rates in the ISMIP6 Antarctic ice sheet projections
journal, January 2020

  • Jourdain, Nicolas C.; Asay-Davis, Xylar; Hattermann, Tore
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 14, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-14-3111-2020

A variational LSTM emulator of sea level contribution from the Antarctic ice sheet
journal, July 2023


Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level rise
journal, March 2016


A High‐End Estimate of Sea Level Rise for Practitioners
journal, November 2022

  • van de Wal, R. S. W.; Nicholls, R. J.; Behar, D.
  • Earth's Future, Vol. 10, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1029/2022EF002751

Future Projections of Antarctic Ice Shelf Melting Based on CMIP5 Scenarios
journal, July 2018

  • Naughten, Kaitlin A.; Meissner, Katrin J.; Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K.
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 31, Issue 13
  • DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0854.1

An intercomparison of regional climate simulations for Europe: assessing uncertainties in model projections
journal, March 2007


The far reach of ice-shelf thinning in Antarctica
journal, December 2017


Exploration of Antarctic Ice Sheet 100-year contribution to sea level rise and associated model uncertainties using the ISSM framework
journal, January 2018

  • Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne; Seroussi, Helene; Schodlok, Michael P.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 12, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-12-3511-2018

Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project (ISMIP6) contribution to CMIP6
journal, January 2016

  • Nowicki, Sophie M. J.; Payne, Anthony; Larour, Eric
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 12
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-4521-2016

Brief communication: PICOP, a new ocean melt parameterization under ice shelves combining PICO and a plume model
journal, January 2019

  • Pelle, Tyler; Morlighem, Mathieu; Bondzio, Johannes H.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 13, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-13-1043-2019

Modelling present-day basal melt rates for Antarctic ice shelves using a parametrization of buoyant meltwater plumes
journal, January 2018

  • Lazeroms, Werner M. J.; Jenkins, Adrian; Gudmundsson, G. Hilmar
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 12, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-12-49-2018

Partitioning the Uncertainty of Ensemble Projections of Global Glacier Mass Change
journal, July 2020

  • Marzeion, Ben; Hock, Regine; Anderson, Brian
  • Earth's Future, Vol. 8, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1029/2019EF001470

The role of history and strength of the oceanic forcing in sea level projections from Antarctica with the Parallel Ice Sheet Model
journal, January 2020


Historical and Future Projected Warming of Antarctic Shelf Bottom Water in CMIP6 Models
journal, May 2021

  • Purich, Ariaan; England, Matthew H.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 48, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.1029/2021GL092752

Aurora Basin, the Weak Underbelly of East Antarctica
journal, April 2020

  • Pelle, Tyler; Morlighem, Mathieu; McCormack, Felicity S.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 47, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1029/2019GL086821

Potential Antarctic Ice Sheet retreat driven by hydrofracturing and ice cliff failure
journal, February 2015

  • Pollard, David; DeConto, Robert M.; Alley, Richard B.
  • Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Vol. 412
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2014.12.035

Projecting Antarctica's contribution to future sea level rise from basal ice shelf melt using linear response functions of 16 ice sheet models (LARMIP-2)
journal, January 2020

  • Levermann, Anders; Winkelmann, Ricarda; Albrecht, Torsten
  • Earth System Dynamics, Vol. 11, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/esd-11-35-2020

Results of the Marine Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project, MISMIP
journal, January 2012


Insights into spatial sensitivities of ice mass response to environmental change from the SeaRISE ice sheet modeling project I: Antarctica: SEARISE ANTARCTICA
journal, June 2013

  • Nowicki, Sophie; Bindschadler, Robert A.; Abe-Ouchi, Ayako
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, Vol. 118, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrf.20081

Committed retreat of Smith, Pope, and Kohler Glaciers over the next 30 years inferred by transient model calibration
journal, January 2015


Antarctic sub-shelf melt rates via PICO
journal, January 2018


ISMIP6-based projections of ocean-forced Antarctic Ice Sheet evolution using the Community Ice Sheet Model
journal, January 2021

  • Lipscomb, William H.; Leguy, Gunter R.; Jourdain, Nicolas C.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 15, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-15-633-2021

A Reconciled Estimate of Ice-Sheet Mass Balance
journal, November 2012


Machine Learning Emulation of Gravity Wave Drag in Numerical Weather Forecasting
journal, July 2021

  • Chantry, Matthew; Hatfield, Sam; Dueben, Peter
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Vol. 13, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1029/2021MS002477

The safety band of Antarctic ice shelves
journal, February 2016

  • Fürst, Johannes Jakob; Durand, Gaël; Gillet-Chaulet, Fabien
  • Nature Climate Change, Vol. 6, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2912

Future sea level change under CMIP5 and CMIP6 scenarios from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets
preprint, December 2020


Benchmark experiments for higher-order and full-Stokes ice sheet models (ISMIP–HOM)
journal, January 2008

  • Pattyn, F.; Perichon, L.; Aschwanden, A.
  • The Cryosphere, Vol. 2, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/tc-2-95-2008

When Gaussian Process Meets Big Data: A Review of Scalable GPs
journal, November 2020

  • Liu, Haitao; Ong, Yew-Soon; Shen, Xiaobo
  • IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, Vol. 31, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2957109

Results from the EISMINT model intercomparison: the effects of thermomechanical coupling
journal, January 2000


Revisiting Antarctic ice loss due to marine ice-cliff instability
journal, February 2019


Response of the Antarctic ice sheet to future greenhouse warming
journal, December 1990

  • Huybrechts, Philippe; Oerlemans, Johannes
  • Climate Dynamics, Vol. 5, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1007/BF00207424

Global environmental consequences of twenty-first-century ice-sheet melt
journal, February 2019


Understanding of Contemporary Regional Sea‐Level Change and the Implications for the Future
journal, July 2020

  • Hamlington, Benjamin D.; Gardner, Alex S.; Ivins, Erik
  • Reviews of Geophysics, Vol. 58, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1029/2019RG000672

The Potsdam Parallel Ice Sheet Model (PISM-PIK) – Part 2: Dynamic equilibrium simulation of the Antarctic ice sheet
journal, January 2011


Uncertainty in East Antarctic Firn Thickness Constrained Using a Model Ensemble Approach
journal, April 2021

  • Verjans, V.; Leeson, A. A.; McMillan, M.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 48, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1029/2020GL092060

Sensitivity of the dynamics of Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, to climate forcing for the next 50 years
journal, January 2014


Insights into spatial sensitivities of ice mass response to environmental change from the SeaRISE ice sheet modeling project II: Greenland: SEARISE GREENLAND
journal, June 2013

  • Nowicki, Sophie; Bindschadler, Robert A.; Abe-Ouchi, Ayako
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, Vol. 118, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1002/jgrf.20076

Grounding-line migration in plan-view marine ice-sheet models: results of the ice2sea MISMIP3d intercomparison
journal, January 2013

  • Pattyn, Frank; Perichon, Laura; Durand, Gaël
  • Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 59, Issue 215
  • DOI: 10.3189/2013JoG12J129